|
20. Conclusion
20.1 As we had said before, we would first like to thank the authors of the Report for listing out the various social service activities of the Sangh. An allegation that is often hurled against the Sangh and other Hindu organisations is that they do not indulge is such creative work. We would also like to thank the authors of the Report for reviving the support base for IDRF. It is heartening to note the number of people who have shown courage in standing up and be counted. But, then, this is not what the authors had set about to do! Their objective is sow confusion, as mentioned in the previous section.
20.2 Having sown the confusion, it becomes necessary for the target of such maliciousness to spend their own resources in counteracting the same. This is unproductive work - but then being unproductive is a hallmark of those who believe in communism. They do not want to be involved in positive works, but in whining. Hence we find the following mention in the Report:
· "Hindutva organizations in the US do extensive publicity and fundraising for the IDRF. Often the IDRF and the VHP-America are the only 'service organizations' recognized by these groups, completely neglecting respected non-sectarian development and relief organizations, such as Association for India's Development (AID), Asha for Education, Pratham-USA, Child Relief and You (CRY), India Development Service (IDS) and Indians for Collective Action (ICA)."
20.3 The success of the volunteers for IDRF, despite the sustained negative projection over such a long period of time, is a clear indication of their dedication and sincerity. If the authors of the Report had spent the same amount of energy that they claim to have done in compiling the data, perhaps they could have been even more successful than the IDRF volunteers. But, then, perhaps they really did not spend much time on this so-called meticulously prepared Report.
20.4 With the increase in the economic well being of the people of Indian origin in the USA, there is a large amount of interest amongst them in doing something for the land of their ancestors. Some people have taken individual initiatives. But this is a luxury that is available to a few. Others do rely on specialised fund-raising organisations, like the IDRF, to guide them in making sure the funds are used properly. One of the things that has impressed the people about the IDRF is its very low level of overheads, and the individual commitments of the people actively working for it.
20.5 The donors are not unintelligent persons who are not able to distinguish between who spreads hatred and who does not. And if the authors of the Report are so concerned about the situation, why have they and their group not organised themselves in the same efficient way that they seem to criticize the Sangh for doing? Would it not have been better if the authors of the Report involved themselves in undertaking something positive and approach a larger section of the Indian Diaspora and so garner more development funds for India? Given the large media publicity that their Report has got, it would appear that they should have better means of reaching the people at large.
20.6 After all, the donor is looking for ways to do some charity. Instead of nit-picking, the authors of the Report should work towards offering a better alternative for people to route their inclination to do some good. If they have resources to come out with a Report on what they claim to be is an extensive survey, surely they could have utilised the same to organise themselves in a way that the Sangh is not able to do.
20.7 The Sangh has always recognised that the work to be done in the society is beyond the capabilities of a single organisation. Thus, where possible, the Sangh works along with others, and so instead of competing, there is a synergy. In this way, the society will gain immensely, and instead of undertaking a programme of creating confusion, the authors of the Report can better involve themselves in doing something positive.
20.8 We also have a request to make of those who seem to be lending support to the authors of the Report - like, Rekhi-Rowen, Hathaway, the faculty members who have signed a petition, etc. We would like them to consider this analysis that we have made. If we are at fault, we would be happy to receive your comments. If even some of the points that we have made have merit, we would like them to acknowledge the same.
20.9 A more important request is to start working in a positive way and raise funds for the needy in India. The activities of the IDRF and of the Sangh will move forward - facing canard and growing despite the various obstacles put in the way is something that they are use to throughout their existence. The matching funds that are provided by the corporations are only a small part of the collection. However, their denial will not mean that the IDRF and the Sangh will find themselves in difficulties. It is the beneficiaries who will suffer.